From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE97FCD1284 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 11:58:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Type:MIME-Version: Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=yZvwwuffk4C6vYsqh7OWkc/SEkgm20qcGxPxeQ+jE7U=; b=F9vUIOYlbDNTjYw8BfQPOx8/Ze isC2MjGLfv2WP3b8fL/OY/mCFz2d95wPGRp0b1Ilp4mCUyjnrzpS9ko9ZT6bxKvdwkc10t21kxYSs JJXxwPqkIdVzQzEh2tTWwz6JaTCPLoBHFK01OtDfgZuT7yvo6QfgU8UkpNC3EJhFpJV4GSqmLnvOk +nvKU8yzR34rGJiSqflD7IE+hFSRbSRefynwS4YCbhZpYGrhTVeT+K2cxSv7VFu7IQ7IuzlOVwWXb 9ZfDmzIG6LTDxd5n2eg7O8rWgD5vFwIaVFbHQNFT2M5xxD4lvw78HAfy5tlCqpD3izY8YvdxM5sbE nlIf25vQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rsLjA-00000002Tb7-3Zxk; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 11:57:56 +0000 Received: from sin.source.kernel.org ([145.40.73.55]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rsLj8-00000002TZm-1Tfv for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 11:57:55 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF440CE3131; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 11:57:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 77253C43394; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 11:57:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1712231871; bh=oyPatv7PBt0holfVUYukJP8QPI1R/fKA+cCRZYJIaig=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Tinh7T1dpbBAZFIvgHQsGQjt/0I1nrX4iqfeXu6jrWUyo0+9kaF8XGmmZlRy6aOC5 Zmwd/1oVr0T/Kg9Nn2oSMiHafCk4mhUXyd+luoCFjq467AEyDpYcK7iDtXUsPiNuNL 8Xw+aNrCE0jUfDUCFdk9Khq/JW4SGqYWP57ZJNTi9Qr4RCiTJ+CzRlcDK20UGnTwSS ob3QmPFqAUTKh2ettqurQvj4LdISg/4YfTfbTQ5wR0iOc4KfVCYkZ4gU1yVcKBDI9G XXN/KsC5vZ7EEiMcW5YxK64qwoTJsXGt87SloFje7xCrntHwidNNeOyVbXW1njOb1D yMiaOE4OIyNbQ== From: Kalle Valo To: Dmitry Baryshkov Cc: Marc Gonzalez , Konrad Dybcio , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Jeff Johnson , ath10k , wireless , DT , MSM , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Pierre-Hugues Husson , Arnaud Vrac , Bjorn Andersson , Jami Kettunen , Jeffrey Hugo Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: msm8998: set qcom,no-msa-ready-indicator for wifi References: <5cdad89c-282a-4df5-a286-b8404bc4dd81@freebox.fr> <252618e8-9e80-4774-a96c-caa7f838ef01@linaro.org> <502322f1-4f66-4922-bc4e-46bacac23410@linaro.org> <0ca1221b-b707-450f-877d-ca07a601624d@freebox.fr> Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2024 14:57:45 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Dmitry Baryshkov's message of "Tue, 2 Apr 2024 18:55:56 +0300") Message-ID: <87ttkh49xi.fsf@kernel.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240404_045754_733398_89388502 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 10.04 ) X-BeenThere: ath10k@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+ath10k=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Dmitry Baryshkov writes: >> 3) ADD that compatible to the wifi node in msm8998.dtsi >> compatible = "qcom,wcn3990-wifi", "qcom,msm8998-wifi"; >> 4) In the driver, set qmi->fake_msa_ready_indicator to true if we >> detect "qcom,msm8998-wifi" >> >> And this approach would be acceptable to both ath10k & DT maintainers? > > I'd say, we should take a step back and actually verify how this was > handled in the vendor kernel. One comment related to this: usually vendor driver and firmware branches go "hand in hand", meaning that a version of driver supports only one specific firmware branch. And there can be a lot of branches. So even if one branch might have a check for something specific, there are no guarantees what the other N+1 branches do :/ -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches